MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014729837 · doi:10.1177/0003702820921465

Critical Assessment of Analytical Methods for the Harmonized and Cost-Efficient Analysis of Microplastics

2020· article· en· W3014729837 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Spectroscopy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroplasticsEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringComputer scienceNanotechnologyEnvironmental chemistryBiochemical engineeringChemistryMaterials scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microplastics are of major concerns for society and is currently in the focus of legislators and administrations. A small number of measures to reduce or remove primary sources of microplastics to the environment are currently coming into effect. At the moment, they have not yet tackled important topics such as food safety. However, recent developments such as the 2018 bill in California are requesting the analysis of microplastics in drinking water by standardized operational protocols. Administrations and analytical labs are facing an emerging field of methods for sampling, extraction, and analysis of microplastics, which complicate the establishment of standardized operational protocols. In this review, the state of the currently applied identification and quantification tools for microplastics are evaluated providing a harmonized guideline for future standardized operational protocols to cover these types of bills. The main focus is on the naked eye detection, general optical microscopy, the application of dye staining, flow cytometry, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-Ir) and microscopy, Raman spectroscopy and microscopy, thermal degradation by pyrolysis-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (py-GC-MS) as well as thermo-extraction and desorption gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (TED-GC-MS). Additional techniques are highlighted as well as the combined application of the analytical techniques suggested. An outlook is given on the emerging aspect of nanoplastic analysis. In all cases, the methods were screened for limitations, field work abilities and, if possible, estimated costs and summarized into a recommendation for a workflow covering the demands of society, legislation, and administration in cost efficient but still detailed manner.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it